Cited by 76EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLinguistics and Language Analysis

Variation in the frequency and characteristics of incidental focus on form

Loewen, Shawn·2003·Language Teaching Research

Abstract

Recently there has been a call for an integration of meaning-focused and form-focused instruction in the second language (L2) classroom, in order to promote both learners’ fluency and accuracy. Incidental focus on form, in which linguistic items are focused on briefly within meaning-focused activities, is one way such an integration might occur. The present study investigates 12 ESL classes in Auckland, New Zealand in order to compare the frequency and characteristics of incidental focus on form episodes (FFEs) occurring in these classes. A total of 32 hours of meaning-focused classroom interaction was observed and recorded. Characteristics of the FFEs, such as Type, Linguistic Focus and Source, were coded and analysed. Incidental focus on form was found to occur in all classes; however, the frequency of FFEs as well as the characteristics varied significantly among the classes. Furthermore, the number of FFEs that each student participated in varied considerably. The implications of such variation for both research and teaching are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1191/1362168803lr129oa

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Loewen's (2003) New Zealand ESL classes, not all students participated equally in focus on form episodes (FFEs); roughly 13% were not involved in any direct exchanges.

    “For example, Loewen (2003) observed that not all students in his New Zealand ESL classes participated equally in FFEs.In fact, roughly 13% of students were not involved in any direct exchanges, suggesting that any benefit for them would have to come through observing the interaction of others.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Loewen 2003

  • Both teachers and learners vary in the extent to which they engage in focus on form.

    “Both teachers and learners vary in the extent to which they engage in focus on form (Loewen, 2003).”

    From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Loewen, 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Loewen, S.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Loewen, Shawn
Venue
Language Teaching Research
Published
2003-07
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
315-345
ISSN
  • 1362-1688 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0954
OpenAlex
W2118717069
Cited by
76
References
31
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
17.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Language Teaching Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
Keywords
form-focused instruction, meaning-focused instruction, second language acquisition, ESL classroom, classroom interaction, fluency and accuracy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review